Haryana

Ambala

CC/306/2021

Khushi Industry - Complainant(s)

Versus

Gopal Polymer - Opp.Party(s)

Vinod Kumar

18 Jan 2022

ORDER

BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, AMBALA.

 

                                                          Complaint case No.: 306 of 2021.

                                                          Date of Institution :   16.09.2021.

                                                          Date of decision    :   18.01.2022.

         

Khushi Industry, through its Sole Proprietor Shri Vinod Kumar s/o Shri Raghu Nath, of village Bari Bassi, P.O. Banaudi, Tehsil Naraingarh, District Ambala 134102. (GSTIN:06CCWPK4289D1Z4)                                                                                                                                       ……. Complainant.

                                                Versus

Gopal Polymer, Plot No.610, Sector 29, Part-2, HUDA, Panipat-132103,through its Director/Managing Director/Proprietor.

E-mail:gopalpolymer17@gmail.com.

Contact No.9992929488 & 9991619100.              

                                                                                       ….…. Opposite Party.

 

Before:        Smt. Neena Sandhu, President.

Shri Vinod Kumar Sharma, Member.          

                            

Present:       Complainant in person.

OP proceeded against ex parte vide order dated 02.12.2021.

 

Order:        Smt. Neena Sandhu, President

                        Complainant has filed this complaint under Section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) against the Opposite Party (hereinafter referred to as ‘OP’), praying for issuance of following directions to it:-

1. To refund the amount of Rs.82,190/-(Rs.50,000/- paid on 26.02.2021 and Rs.32,190/- paid on 24.03.2021, to the OP) alongwith interest @ 18 percent per annum from the date of deposit, till its actual realization.
2. To pay Rs.21,000/- as compensation for the mental agony and physical harassment suffered by the complainant.
3. To pay Rs. 21,000/- as litigation expenses.
4. Any other relief which this Hon’ble Commission may deem fit.

 

 Brief facts of the case are that complainant is doing the business of manufacturing and trading of the washing powder under the name and style of Khushi industry, (a limited company incorporated under the Indian Companies Act). Complainant is the sole proprietor of the said company and doing this business for earning his livelihood by way of self employment. Complainant was in dire need of open printed pouches of good quality, for packing of washing powder. In the first week of February, 2021, complainant alongwith his brother in law, contacted the OP at Panipat. OP assured the complainant that best quality of packing pouches will be provided to him. On 15.02.2021, complainant visited the office of the OP and sample of printed pouches were shown to him and was told that the rate of one kg of the pouches will be of Rs.180/-.  On the assurance of the OP, complainant ordered for 100 kgs of printed pouches. The OP further told the complainant that he will use 4 cylinders of gas for the work of printing on the pouches and the expenses for which will be of Rs.18,000/- extra. On 15.02.2021, complainant paid Rs.18,000/-, to the OP who told him that pouches will be delivered to him on 24.03.2021, after the payment of remaining amount. On 26.02.2021, complainant paid Rs.50000/-to the OP through NEFT. On 24.03.2021, complainant visited the OP and requested him to deliver 100 kg of printed pouches. OP demanded the remaining payment of Rs.32,190/-, which the complainant paid through NEFT. OP told the complainant to come on 25.03.2021, to take the delivery of printed pouches. On 25.03.2021, complainant visited the OP and it intentionally gave a invoice memo No.999 dated 25.03.2021 of Rs.21,240/- only instead of full amount paid by the complainant. After taking the delivery of the said printed pouches, complainant used the same for the purpose of packing the washing powder but after some time, the said pouches got shrunk and the colour got faded. The OP delivered him the spurious/sub standard quality of printed packing pouches, as a result whereof, complainant got humiliated and suffered a great loss in his business. Complainant served a legal notice dated 11.08.2021, upon the OP but of no avail. By supplying the inferior/sub standard quality of printed packing pouches, the OP has committed deficiency in service. Hence the present complaint.

2.                Upon notice, none appeared on behalf of the OP, before this Commission, therefore, it was proceeded against ex-parte vide order dated 02.12.2021.

3.                Complainant tendered his affidavit as Annexure CA along with documents Annexure C-1 to C-4 and closed the evidence.

4.                We have heard the complainant and have also gone through the record very carefully.

5.                Complainant has contended that he purchased 100 kgs of printed poly bags from the OP, @ Rs.180/- per kg, but the OP supplied him the inferior/substandard quality of the printed poly bags. To prove this fact, complainant has placed on record the photographs of the printed pouches, Annexure C-3. It is pertinent to mention here that at the time of arguments, complainant brought the packet of poly bags, to show to the Bench. On looking at the packet of poly bags it was observed that the colour of the printing had faded. Complainant took out one poly bag from the packet and rubbed his fingers on it, the colour printed on the bag, came off and stuck on his fingers.  As such, we find force in the contention of the complainant that the OP had supplied the inferior/sub standard quality of printed poly bags to him, therefore, it is liable to refund the cost of the said poly bags. As per the complainant, in total he paid Rs.82,190/- to the OP i.e. Rs.50,000/- on 26.02.2021 and Rs.32,190/- on 24.03.2021, to the OP, through NEFT and has placed on record the statement of account, Annexure C-1. In the complaint, complainant has categorically stated that he purchased 100 kgs of poly bags @ Rs.180/- per kg, from the OP. Meaning thereby the cost of the printed packing pouches was of Rs.18,000/- only. No doubt, complainant has stated that the OP had charged extra amount from him, for use of 4 cylinders of gas, for the work of printing on the pouches.  But no documentary evidence has been produced by the complainant, in this regard. Once the total cost of the product is of Rs.18,000/-, then as to why and for what purpose complainant had paid Rs.50,000/-, on 26.02.2021 and Rs.32,190/-, on 26.03.2021, to the OP. No reason whatsoever has been given by the complainant. From the perusal of tax invoice dated 25.03.2021, Annexure C-3, it is evident that complainant purchased 100 Kgs poly bags @ Rs.180/- per kg and paid Rs.18,000/-, plus Rs.3,240/-, as GST and the OP raised the bill of Rs.21,240/-. Since, the GST amount has to be paid to the Government, therefore, complainant is entitled to get the refund of the amount of Rs.18,000/- only and not Rs.82,190/- as claimed by the complainant. He is also entitled to get compensation for the mental agony and physical harassment suffered by the complainant alongwith litigation expenses.

6.       In view of the aforesaid discussion, we hereby partly allow the present complaint and direct the OPs, in the following manner:-

                   i)       To refund the amount of Rs.18,000/-,to the complainant.

                   ii)      To pay Rs.5,000/- as compensation for deficiency in service                          and the mental agony and physical harassment caused to the                          complainant.

                   iii)     To pay Rs.3,000/- as litigation expenses.

                    

                   The OPs are further directed to comply with the aforesaid directions within the period of 45 days from the date of receipt of the certified copy of this order, failing which, they shall pay interest @ 5% per annum on the awarded amount, from the date of filing of complaint i.e 16.09.2021, till its realization. Certified copy of this order be supplied to the parties concerned, forthwith, free of cost as permissible under Rules. File be indexed and consigned to the Record Room.

Announced on: 18.01.2022.

 

 

 

          (Vinod Kumar Sharma)                                (Neena Sandhu)

              Member                                                   President

 

 

Present:       Complainant in person.

OP proceeded against ex parte vide order dated 02.12.2021.

 

Vide our separate detailed order of even date, the present complaint has been partly allowed. File be consigned to Record Room, after due compliance.

Announced on:18.01.2022.

 

 

 

 

          (Vinod Kumar Sharma)                                 (Neena Sandhu)

              Member                                                    President